I'm thinking about buying one of these this weekend. What are your thoughts /o/?
>>14626623
if you want a 3400lb 4banger.. well, i cant stop you..
>>14626631
270hp stock, not 2 shabby
>>14626637
because you can get a mustang gt for the same money.
>>14626623
I think you're a faggot
>>14626688
But I don't want a pigfat mustang gt.
>>14626711
it's only 200lbs more..
and twice the cylinders
>>14626711
But you want a pigfat 4banger?
>>14626717
>>14626730
And handles like shit.
>>14626711
The mustang will be more reliable. Less stuff to go wrong over a turbo car.
>>14626734
The new s550 mustang handles great.
>>14626717
Twice the cylinders, and only makes 30 more horsepower.
>>14626734
The newer ones don't.
>>14626623
>heavy
>worst looking WRX to date
>Bad handling
Do whatever you want with your money I guess
You'll never drive it to its full potential. Get something that's more practical.
>>14626742
435-270 = 30
WRX has a higher power to weight ratio than the Mustang GT does.
>>14626734
Mustang is 3 seconds faster around streets of willow if you want to bench race.
>>14626761
Never drive it to its full potential? We aren't talking about a supercar here.
>>14626763
2016 Subaru WRX base power/weight .0825
2016 Mustang GT Base .117
Wrong again
>>14626763
It's also tuned to within an inch of it's life. A less-stressed engine is always better unless you're in a race and durability doesn't matter.
>>14626784
Gonna go do some rallycross with it?
>>14626796
People have been reliably modding WRX's for years. Granted, the 2015 and above have a new engine so they haven't been tested as much.
>>14626812
Yes.
There is either one really mad, or a bunch of ass blasted people getting salty as fuck about the bad stats coming out of the super dry WRX. Why?
I don't get how it's hard for people to grasp that Subaru got lazy. That's why everyone hopes the focus RT takes off well enough to make Subaru try again
>>14626831
>upgraded interior
>new engine
Subaru got lazy.
Its okay I guess.
Very cost effective.
are you gona drift it or what?
>>14626847
Marginal, if any performance gain, consumer rated poorer handling, and an update to 2008 worthy interiors good job :p
One of my co workers has a brand new one and my friend has a 2003 and the interiors literally just have cooler lines in the seat, and nicer lights
>>14626858
And what do you have?
Here's my reasoning for not going with something like the Mustang GT. I've driven a lot of big american v8s, they are fun, they sound great, but there is always a feeling of disconnect with the road to me. I don't feel like you get the same gritty feeling cornering hard in a american muscle car like you get in a little import. They are probably more fun in a straight line, but that's not what im after.
I've owned one for about 6 months now. Really depends on what you're wanting out of it. If you buy a base model it is nowhere near as spendy as a fucking mustang gt, no idea what they are on about. My fully loaded 2016 wrx was still cheaper than any gt I could find in my area. 4 door turbo charged awd vehicle. It's been a good car for me so far. I wasn't a fan of the mustang I test drove, but I'm by no means an expert. I also live in an area that gets heavy snow.
>>14626876
A motorcycle and a commuter econobox because any vehicle I'd waste money isn't in my feasible price bracket at my current financial state. And having driven all the major three muscle cars and a couple of the imports, I still found the muscles more fun besides the challenger, I just think having rwd and more power feels more raw and in tune with the road than having AWD and control all the time always forever
>>14626876
Go to your local ford dealer. Ask to drive a 2016 Mustang GT. Put it Sport or Track mode. See if you have the same opinion after taking it down a windy road. I had the same opinions on mustangs believing all the /o/ maymays lolcant turn pigfat and now I own one.
>>14626897
I have a motorcycle as well, it's definitely vehicle of choice, but I live in Oregon and it rains constantly, and riding in the rain is complete balls. AWD turbo is good for those days.
>>14626688
yeah but it was designed by a 15yr old
>>14626736
>The mustang will be more reliable
>>14626631
Underrated comment.
Poobaru and Turd fags going at it. Good thread.
>>14626623
Buy a dirt cheap reliable 1995-2004 civic and use the rest of the money you would have spent on that shitbox on a motorcycle of your choice. I recommend a street legal enduro. Thank me later
>>14626623
I would get a V8 Mustang over this. The WRX gives good thrills but it's overrated and priced ridiculously high.
Probably one of the most overrated cars in existence. BTJM
>>14626823
lies.
WRX: $26k
Mustang GT: $32k
am I missing something here?
I was looking at an 09 WRX myself actually. Don't know what year that one is, but what a coincidence. It's either the WRX or a c30 volvo.
>>14626623
anything but that & bug eye is good.
Corolla with a hood scoop
>>14626623
You'll enjoy driving it, and thats what really natters
>>14626623
It's pigfat, overpriced and looks like an 8 year old's wet dream. The combination of all 3 just makes it bad.
>>14626796
not really, there have been impressive numbers coming from just a simple flash tune. Most turbo engines are detuned just cause of emission reasons
